Everything Draco did made no sense without a battle!
If you are going to deviate from the book and make a standalone movie fine!
Just make it make sense!

Exactly.

By having no battle, or at least no hints of any battle, you suggest that Hogwarts isn't appropriately guarded. If it's not appropriately guarded then why are 4+ Death Eaters required + Snape?

Surely Draco and Snape alone could have killed DD without the need for the DEs to infiltrate? The potential argument here would be to validate Snape's loyalty but even then you'd only need Bellatrix, for example, to infiltrate the school.

It trivialises the entire invasion 'party' to not have a battle of sorts, and by extension the entire trial that Draco is going through throughout the movie.

If it's not appropriately guarded then why are 4+ Death Eaters required + Snape?

A precaution because maybe they may meet resistance? It just turns out that they didn't.

Edit: The fact is that in the book the school isn't guarded well. For God's sake the school was infiltrated through a room Dumbledore knows exits. Updated surveys of every item in that room should have been performed.

A precaution because maybe they may meet resistance? It just turns out that they didn't.

Edit: The fact is that in the book the school isn't guarded well. For God's sake the school was infiltrated through a room Dumbledore knows exits. Updated surveys of every item in that room should have been performed.

A room he stumbled into one night - we don't know if he knew its full power or if he even found it again.
In the book the school is guarded, the aurors walk the halls and DD puts more in charge when he left the school - which would mean he probably took that precautions every time he left.

A precaution because maybe they may meet resistance? It just turns out that they didn't.

Edit: The fact is that in the book the school isn't guarded well. For God's sake the school was infiltrated through a room Dumbledore knows exits. Updated surveys of every item in that room should have been performed.

The school is meant to be the most guarded and safe place in the magical world, it's stated many times. The only reason I can think of that they were able to get in is because of the nature of the Room of Requirement and because Dumbledore didn't want to endanger Malfoy.

I'm sorry but I agree with the above poster, no battle of any kind is triviality especially when Bellatrix is smashing things up. It's not one of my major gripes, quite a minor one actually, but it is still true.

The school is meant to be the most guarded and safe place in the magical world, it's stated many times.

It doesn't matter, IMO, how many times it is stated, because in every book we see the security of the castle undermined by some agent or artefact of Voldemort. And apparently Dumbledore doesn't notice this agent under his very nose.

Strike the "apparently". Dumbledore doesn't know when one of his teachers is being possessed by Voldemort, and Dumbledore doesn't know when one of his teachers is imprisoned and impersonated by an agent who, after many years in Azkaban, might be assumed to be a bit rusty on the old magical abilities side.

In PoA and GoF it transpired that Dumbledore didn't know that various pupils, over various decades, were unregistered animagi.

In HBP Dumbledore is fully aware that one of his pupils - an infamous bully whose behaviour he has done nothing to curb over several years - is wandering around trying to kill him, or, pretty much anybody who gets in the way.

I could go on, but the security of Hogwarts is presented as being poor, whatever is stated.

I could go on, but the security of Hogwarts is presented as being poor, whatever is stated.

I still believe in the book that was JKR reason for Malfoy and the vanishing closet - why else put it in? It makes sense in the book for Draco to want back up.
It didn't in the film. Draco knew the security - and was proved right in the book - he needed back up to get to DD.
Why leave the battle out and put in something that would take the same amount of time and money and really make no sense - the attacking of the burrow.
Why were they there? what was its purpose?

I could go on, but the security of Hogwarts is presented as being poor, whatever is stated.

It is but in a different way. It's not poor because of a lack of security but because the security is, for a lack of a better and nicer word, incompetent - for me that still doesn't allieviate the fact that there's ONE Auror seen guarding Hogwarts as the quantity should at least be adequate even if the competence is wanting.

It's made even more silly by the fact we see multiple Aurors patrolling the halls earlier on the movie! Where'd the rest go? For a magical donut?

Everything Draco did made no sense without a battle!
If you are going to deviate from the book and make a standalone movie fine!
Just make it make sense!

Except it made perfect sense. Have you read the book?

The point of the vanishing cabinet was to both get inside Hogwarts, and to get in undercover without resistance until they got the deed done. Dumbledore knows that once Snape kills him, Snape will become the leader of the pack. Why have the Order members protect the school while he's away for a few hours when they're lives will be put in danger as well as Snape's (who is innocent)? He knows Snape well enough to know he wouldn't betray the students and teachers that soon, that's why in the film you see him marching out of there as fast as possible (which is really iconic). It's not like he doesn't meet opposition on the way out, either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Myrmedus

or me that still doesn't allieviate the fact that there's ONE Auror seen guarding Hogwarts as the quantity should at least be adequate even if the competence is wanting.

There was an auror guarding that door, not the entire castle. The scene during the opening feast was the only time where we saw many aurors at once, and it made sense, because it was the beginning of the school year and things weren't under control yet.

I can definitely agree with the people who complain about the romance though. Romance is fine but it felt like 2/3 of this movie was romance - at times it felt more like a RomCom than a HP movie.

Now the book HBP had alot of romance but it also had alot of discussion between Harry and Dumbledore to balance out that romance during the school year - the movie lacked that discussion and thus the balance was lost.

I don't know I just disagree. I felt it was balanced enough. To teach it's own,

It seems to me that every movie is worse than the previous. Am I the only one who thinks this?

I thought that the first movie was fantastic. It had the good dumbledore (actor). You could understand everything they said (They didn't mumble.) They included almost every scene from the book, and it just gave me a "magic" feeling.

One thing that really annoys me, is that the movies are all so inconsistent with each other. Everything is constantly changing. Each movie has a different: Hogwarts, Hagrid's cabin, Whomping willow, Fireplace talking (Sirius & Harry), the quiditch stadium, Their clothes (from school robes to muggle clothes).

One thing that really annoys me, is that the movies are all so inconsistent with each other. Everything is constantly changing. Each movie has a different: Hogwarts, Hagrid's cabin, Whomping willow, Fireplace talking (Sirius & Harry), the quiditch stadium, Their clothes (from school robes to muggle clothes).

One thing that really annoys me, is that the movies are all so inconsistent with each other. Everything is constantly changing. Each movie has a different: Hogwarts, Hagrid's cabin, Whomping willow, Fireplace talking (Sirius & Harry), the quiditch stadium, Their clothes (from school robes to muggle clothes).

And the list goes on, and on, and on, and on, and on...

Am I the only one to notice this? Try re-watching all the movies.

No, I have noticed it as well, but it is because the different directors had different ideas of how they wanted the feel and look of the movie to be.
I don't have a problem about it, but that's just me. I, personally, extremely enjoyed the movie.

First of all, the start, wow. That really got me excited with Harry at the MoM with the photographers. Anyone else feel that way?

I really enjoyed the movie, i thought the cinematography and CG really stood out from the other films, the movie looked so different to what it has done in the past, it suited the world of HP brilliantly. For example, the memories looked amazing. I dont really know how else to describe it so raw and edgy.

That said, fairly disapointed with what wasnt in the film, and i just cant understand why they left out bits like DD telling Harry about the 3 other suspected horcruxs, I mean come on it would be like 2 extra minutes, also more profling of riddle, for instance were you see Tom Riddle take offence to another Tom.

Reminder: Whoever feels the need to tell other posters to reread and/or rewatch anything to be able to discuss the HBP movie with them, because their opinion is the only one that counts, will find themselves suspended from this forum very soon.

.:CoS Forums Rules:.View full rules here2a. The goal of CoS Forums is to make sure everyone has a good time and can make friends. Obviously not everyone will agree with one another and we ask that you respect the opinions of others. Making sarcastic, or rude remarks directed at another member, or attacking others for holding views different to your own will not be tolerated. If you see this taking place, please report it to an Unspeakable or Admin immediately. Do not respond to the aggressor.

Reminder: Whoever feels the need to tell other posters to reread and/or rewatch anything to be able to discuss the HBP movie with them

Which should segue into a new topic presented by me!

Been how long since HBP is out? Dunno, not caring enough to look it up. However what I do care about is that the hype and anticipation is gone now and like the old saying goes, "Hunger is the best spice," so therefore now that all of us consumed HBP; in hindsight has anyone's opinion of the film changed?

Has anyone seen HBP as of recent? Does it hold up at all? Why I ask this is due to reading all the criticism and details about HBP, it sort of made me reflect on the film after it was out of my headspace for a while. Especially after watching other films post HBP release. Granted for a few of opinions changed after years between viewings or over the years; but considering on this board how much of a supernova comet HBP was made out to be; I'm just wondering if it's cinematic flame is holding true or has it fizzled out faster than a sparkler in some people's opinions. While we aren't anticipating HBP anymore. I'm sure anticipating this new line of discussion!

I think HBP gets worse and worse the more I think about it. It's just a boring movie IMO. It's not like POA, GOF and even OOTP, where there is some kind of dramatic meat to latch onto throughout the movie, with Black's appearances, the tasks and Umbridge all anchoring the movies right through to the climax. Most of the incidents in the first 1.5 hours of HBP are throwaway tripe that don't leave any lasting impression, Quidditch, Lavender, Ginny, the Potions book, these things are tossed away and forgotten about as soon as Harry gets the real memory. They were a waste of time. Aside from the crushing structural issues, the atmosphere of the movie was totally wrong. Once we got to Hogwarts, it felt the same as always. Yates did a truly terrible job of showing that a war was going on outside the castle, and the lack of Voldemort meant that it was difficult to connect Harry and Dumbledore's lessons to anything outside the castle, and the lack of Dumbledore screentime combined with a failure to adequately convey what he meant to the wider wizard world, meant his death felt very limp. It's kind of shocking that they never saw fit to reintroduce the idea the Voldemort was afraid of Dumbledore, that could have played nicely into the orphanage memory and also explained why Voldy didn't enter the castle with the other DEs. It reminds me of Terminator Salvation, where there were a lot of good ideas that were just not explored fully or executed well enough.

I saw Half-Blood Prince five times during its initial theatrical exhibition, and expect to see it once again at a nearby second-run theatre in either September or October. Overall, my opinion of the film has slightly changed, though it still remains relatively the same as it was after my first viewing on 15 July. Originally, the only parts of the film that I truly disliked were the lack of explanation as to the locations of the remaining Horcruxes and the musical score; however, I have since added a few more aspects of the film to my list of dislikes, and I shall state them below.

1. I believe that the script could have been superior. Yates and Kloves, in my opinion, delved too deeply into plots that have little to do with Harry's story, which, in my opinion, is about him discovering the secrets to destroying Voldemort, accompanied by his growing trust in Dumbledore and his lessening trust of Snape and Draco. Instead of constructing a screenplay centred on these topics, the filmmakers appeared to have decided to simply include as many plot-points frmo the novel as was possible, not really considering how they have connect with Harry's story. The title of this film is HARRY POTTER and the Half-Blood Prince; why, therefore, must we spend a large portion of the film watching events that have more relation to Ron and Hermione? Yates and Kloves could have easily omitted Quidditch and the things regarding Slughorn's Christmas party; neither of these have a real relation to Harry's story, which would remain exactly the same without them. This poses other issues with the film, as well. Because its centre is not on Harry, Dumbledore and especially Snape do not receive the screen-time that their roles merit; Dumbledore disappears for about a half-hour or more in the middle, while Snape never truly had the presence that he needed. In addition, the filmmakers could have easily done away with such scenes as Fred and George's joke-shop, which appeared to be present simply to please the fans and impress the audience with eye-catching effects; I do agree that it was visual appealing, but, subject-wise, was unneeded.

2. Due to this focus on Ron and Hermione's romance plot, the tone of the movie was often inappropriate. The film is supposed to be about Dumbledore having to enlighten Harry as to how to vanquish Voldemort before his death, with threats from both Draco and Snape intertwined, yet it rarely feels as though Dumbledore is in his final days, or even that there is a war happening outside of the castle's walls. The scene involving Romilda's love-potion, I believe, was one of the worst that shows Yates's poor handling of the film's tone; I do not believe that anybody in any of the showings of the film that I attended made the connection between the girl that Ron claims to be in love with and the one that Hermione mentioned minutes upon minutes earliier in the library, and the mood of the scene switches from comedic to serious much too frequently. Although I cannot currently think of one, I am sure that there could have been several superior alternatives to this scene that retains the sense of seriousness and danger throughout its entirety.

3. The editing was a bit choppy in some scenes, especially towards the end of the film. As I have previously said, during the Burrow attack, we see Ginny kneel over to retrieve her wand from the water after Harry throws his spell at Greyback, and yet we never saw her drop it, and, towards the end of the film, either Mark Day or David Yates unnecessarily cuts between nearly the same shots of Harry reacting to things on several occasions. For example, after the Inferius grabs Harry's arm while he is attempting to scoop up the water with the shell, we see Harry draw backwards from the lake, and then we see about five almost identical shots of Harry's face as he reacts to what has occurred. Why could they have not simply used a single long take that shows all of this? Similar things happen on the Astronomy Tower and during the Flight of the Prince scene.

4. As others have observed on this website, Hooper and Yates use the same tracks from the musical score at a variety of places in the film with little reason for doing such. Why put the music from the "Drink of Despair" scene, which is quite an emotional section of the film, during the Sectumsempra scene? Why have the music that plays over the opening titles nearly the same as that which plays when Harry is crying over Dumbledore's body? It ruins a lot of the emotional impact of these scenes. In addition, I still cannot believe that Hooper slapped versions of the "Hedwig's Theme" track that sound as though it is from Chamber of Secrets into the scene at the Burrow and on the Hogwarts Express. I, for one, am glad that he will not be returning to score the Deathly Hallows films.

That being said, in terms of overall enjoyment, I still find the film to be fun to watch. Delbonnel's cinematography is stunning, as is the acting from some of the older actors, such as Michael Gambon and Jim Broadbent. In addition, I still cannot refrain from laughing during the scenes involving Harry being under the influence of Felix Felices; "Hi!" and "pincers" are still two of my favourite moments in the entire film.

4. As others have observed on this website, Hooper and Yates use the same tracks from the musical score at a variety of places in the film with little reason for doing such. Why put the music from the "Drink of Despair" scene, which is quite an emotional section of the film, during the Sectumsempra scene? Why have the music that plays over the opening titles nearly the same as that which plays when Harry is crying over Dumbledore's body? It ruins a lot of the emotional impact of these scenes. In addition, I still cannot believe that Hooper slapped versions of the "Hedwig's Theme" track that sound as though it is from Chamber of Secrets into the scene at the Burrow and on the Hogwarts Express. I, for one, am glad that he will not be returning to score the Deathly Hallows films.

Reusing tracks is common in a film series. The reason the bit of music played over the title at the beginning where Harry and Dumbledore are together is the same as when Dumbledore dies is because, and I quote from the HBP score liner notes, "it [provides] the musical DNA for Dumbledore's story throughout the movie".

If you compare Hedwig's Theme to every other version, it sounds different. Slightly so, but still different. This is also true for the bit of music from PoA during the Quidditch match.

Edit: By the way, using parts of tracks different times throughout the film is usually an indicator that it is a theme.